James Rachels argues that killing, in itself, is not necessarily morally worse than letting die.

SHORT PAPER #5
Assignment directions:
James Rachels argues that killing, in itself, is not necessarily morally worse than letting die.

Section 1: Summary: In the first section of your paper, explain the cases of Jones and Smith. Then, tell us how Rachels thinks those cases are supposed to show that killing is morally on par with letting die.

Section 2: Evaluation: In the second section, raise ONE criticism of the Jones/Smith argument. In other words, provide a reason for why we should think that killing is worse than letting die.

DO NOT FORGET: ONCE YOU SUBMIT YOUR ESSAY, YOU NEED TO OBJECT TO ONE OTHER STUDENT’S ESSAY.

Formatting, length, style, and other guidelines:
Your reply to a classmate is worth 5 of the 20 points. Make sure your reply is substantive and critical (provides an objection to their evaluation and gives reasons why the objection is correct). This means that you need to say more than “good job, but I disagree”. If you find yourself making a comment that could easily be copy/pasted into every reply of the semester (because it is not specific), then you need to know that comment will not receive any points. Furthermore, make sure you are objecting to the view that your classmate expresses in his/her evaluation section, even if you agree with that person. Think of yourself as a devil’s advocate. So, if, in the evaluation section, your classmate says: “X is the case”, your reply should be “Someone might say that X is not the case, and here’s a reason why…” If you fail to provide an objection, you will lose 5 points.
Your paper should be 300-600 words (about 1-2 pages). This is a target/suggestion, not a hard and fast rule.
Your paper should have two sections. Label them Section 1: Summary and Section 2: Evaluation.
The title of your paper should be Short Paper 5: Euthanasia.
Think through this on your own. Avoid using outside sources; but if you do use them, cite them!
As for the level of discussion: a good rule of thumb is to imagine that you are explaining this argument to a smart peer in the class who is otherwise up-to-date on the course readings, but has not read the chapter.
Clarity: Use simple, direct language; avoid complicated, elaborate prose. Explain key concepts. Use examples where appropriate. Avoid metaphor and figurative language. Dont use rhetorical questions; instead, state and defend your claims.
Concision: Dont use many words where fewer will do, and avoid redundancy. Do NOT include an introduction, its a waste of space in an paper this short. Just immediately begin answering the assigned prompts. Likewise, there is no need for a conclusion that merely sums up your short paper.
Relevance: Stay focused, and avoid generalities. The point of this essay is for you to explain and evaluate a specific argument given by a philosopher. Stick to the point; avoid tangents; everything in your paper should be organized around the prompts.
Charity: Avoid distortive presentations of the arguments (or anyone elses). Give every argument you discuss the strongest, reasonable interpretation.
Citations: Every paper you write should include parenthetical citations! Failure to cite results in a significant penalty. See “MUST READ: Discussion Board Rules” for examples of how to cite.
Deadline and how to submit:
Due Sunday by 11:59 pm. The paper can be written in a separate word processor, then copy/pasted into the ‘reply’ text box. Or, less ideally, you can type it directly into the text box. DO NOT SUBMIT FILES!

Last Completed Projects